Names, locations, topics. Entries in footnotes in italics. Topics covered by certain chapters are not included. Names and locations in source references, in the bibliography and in lists are not included.

C.T. Duffy, 88 Men and 2 Women, Doubleday, New York 1962, p. 101 (13-15 min.); C.T. Duffy was warden of San Quentin Prison for almost 12 years, during which time he ordered the execution of 88 men and 2 women, many of them executed in the local gas chamber.

Such is the title of a documentary movie directed by Errol Morris about Fred Leuchter, shown at the Sundance Film Festivals in Park City (Utah, USA) in late January 1999: "Mr. Death: The Rise and Fall of Fred A. Leuchter, Jr." There are actually several versions of this movie, the one offered as a VHS video for retail being massively reworked.

dpa, "Dilettantische Kammerjäger", Kreiszeitung, Böblinger Bote, Nov. 16, 1995, p. 7. Research has failed to determine which toxic gas was involved. Since hydrogen cyanide is one of the most poisonous and most rapidly diffusing of all gases used in disinfestation, the reported damage would have been at least as great if caused by hydrogen cyanide, even if hydrogen cyanide was not in fact involved in this accident. A number of additional examples are described by K. Naumann: "Die Blausäurevergiftung bei der Schädlingsbekämpfung", Zeitschrift für hygienische Zoologie und Schädlingsbekämpfung, 1941, pp. 36-45.

www.osha.gov/media/oshnews/may99/national-19990510.html; see also The Plain Dealer, Dec. 19, 1999, p. 30A; Nation-The Orange County Register, Jan. 9, 2000, News 11; Allan Elias was sentenced to 17 years imprisonment on April 28, 2000, APBnews.com, April 29, 2000, www.apbnews.com/safetycenter/business/2000/04/29/safetycrime0429_01.html and .../safetycrime0429_doc.html: The cyanide-contaminated sludge in the tank also contained phosphoric acid, resulting in the release of cyanide gas.

E. Emmerling, in: M. Petzet (ed.), Holzschädlingsbekämpfung durch Begasung, Arbeitshefte des Bayerischen Landesamtes für Denkmalpflege (Working Notebooks of the Bavarian State Office for Monument Maintenance), vol. 75, Lipp-Verlag, Munich 1995, pp. 43-56. Whether the examples cited in the paper may perhaps refer to the above mentioned case only in a roundabout way, must remain open for the time being. Carl Hermann Christmann reports the case of a farm building belonging to an 18th century monastery; the farm building was sold to a farmer following secularization, and the farmer then used it as a barn. Approximately 20 years ago, an investor converted the beautiful Baroque building into a luxury holiday restaurant. The existing interior plaster was repaired and painted white. After some time, blue stains appeared in the white paint; the stains were identified by a consulting expert as Iron Blue. The expert assumed that the former owner must have fumigated the building with hydrogen cyanide between 1920 and 1940, which then caused the stains 40-50 years later. Personal communication from C.H. Christmann according to his recollection on July 13, 1999; Mr. Christmann was unfortunately unable to find the source of the information. I would be extremely grateful for any references to passages in the literature in relation to this case.

The Fabius-Gayssot Law was passed in France in 1990, rendering punishable the 'denial of the facts' of the National Socialist war crimes 'ascertained' at the Nuremburg Trials of 1946 convened by the Allied powers. In 1993, Austria followed suit (sec. 3h Criminal Law); in 1994, Germany (sec. 130 Criminal Code, new version), in 1995, Switzerland (sec. 216bis Criminal Code) and in 1996, Spain enacted similar laws. A similar law passed in Belgium in 1997 has not yet been enforced. Poland adopted a similar law in 2000, Hungary is currently preparing to introduce one. Canada and Australia have created 'Human Rights Commissions' which persecute revisionists although there is no legal framework for this.

J.-C. Pressac, Jour J, December 12, 1988, pp. I-X. See also the related discussion in the undated translation, without references; see also Pressac in: S. Shapiro (Ed.), Truth Prevails: Demolishing Holocaust Denial: The End of the Leuchter Report, Beate Klarsfeld Foundation, New York 1990.

Richard J. Green, Jamie McCarthy, "Chemistry is Not the Science", May 2, 1999, online: holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/chemistry/not-the-science/. About 50% of the article consists of political accusations and vilification. For a response, see G. Rudolf, "Character Assassins", online: www.vho.org/GB/c/GR/CharacterAssassins.html.

Throughout his writings, Adalbert Rückerl, one of the most prominent German prosecutors in 'Holocaust cases', dispenses with any mention of material evidence. Instead, he declares documentary evidence the best and most important form of evidence, even in the absence of material evidence for the authenticity and correctness of the documents themselves (in J. Weber, P. Steinbach (eds.), Vergangenheitsbewältigung durch Strafverfahren?, Olzog, Munich 1984, p. 77). Rückerl reports that it is practically impossible to find a suspect guilty solely on documentary evidence, so that, especially given the increasing time span separating alleged crimes from trial, it is almost always necessary to fall back on eyewitness testimony, even though its unreliability is clear, particularly in trials of so-called 'National Socialist violent crimes' (A. Rückerl, NS-Verbrechen vor Gericht, C. F. Müller, Heidelberg 1984, p. 249; Rückerl, Nationalsozialistische Vernichtungslager im Spiegel deutscher Strafprozesse, dtv, Munich 1978, p. 34; Rückerl, NS-Prozesse, C. F. Müller, Karlsruhe 1972, pp. 27, 29, 31).

Epidemic Typhus, which is also called European, Classic, or Louse-Borne Typhus, or Jail Fever, is a louse-borne disease caused by bacteria belonging to the Rickettsia group. Whereas Typhus is the term used in English to refer to all diseases caused by various Rickettsia bacteria, the German term is "Fleckfieber", which, in English, is used only for one type of typhus, the so-called Rocky Montain Spotted Fever that is transferred by ticks; see http://www.merck.com/pubs/mmanual/section13/chapter159/159a.htm

On the history of the firm, mixed with Holocaust story telling, see Jürgen Kalthoff, Martin Werber, Die Händler des Zyklon B, VSA-Verlag, Hamburg 1998; much more factual and technically correct is the work by Wolfgang Lambrecht, Otto Karl, op. cit. (note 105).

The gross mass given on the label of a Zyklon B can always refered to the net HCN content of the can, i.e., excluding the mass of the carrier material. That means for instance that a 1 kg Zyklon B can consisted of 1 kg HCN plus some 2 kg of carrier material, i.e., a 1 kg can had a total mass of some 3 kg.

See also the Höß order relating to the avoidance of accidental poisoning during the disinfestation of barracks, reproduced by J.-C. Pressac, op. cit. (note 67), p. 201. For each barracks with a volume of approximately 40m×12m×3.5m > 1,500 m3, this means a requirement of 15 kg Zyklon B; the 100 barracks in Birkenau camp alone would require 1.5 tons!

Steel reinforcement rods in concrete are only practicable when the iron is deeply embedded in the concrete and therefore protected for decades against corrosion by the very durable alkaline environment of the concrete, since concrete is only slowly carbonated by the carbon dioxide (CO2) in the environment, resulting in a neutralization of its pH value. The reinforcement rods in the ceiling of the morgue in question lie directly on the surface, where the pH value would fall very quickly (i.e., would become less alkaline), particularly when rain water containing CO2 penetrated the concrete; see the crack in Fig. 25 which would quickly allow the entry of rain water.

The present writer has before him a sketch of the ground plan of the crematorium, built in 1939, in the Sachsenhausen concentration camp, which is similar in design and dimensions with crematoria II and III at Auschwitz, yet no mass murders are alleged to have occurred at Sachsenhausen. Reference should also be made to the construction design of modern crematoria: H.-K. Boehlke, Friedhofsbauten, Callwey Verlag, Munich 1974, in particular, the crematorium diagram on p. 117, including a doctor's office; E. Neufert, Bauentwurfslehre, Ullstein Fachverlag, Frankfurt 1962, pp. 423f.

Schreiber was the Supervising Engineer at the Kattowitz agency of the Huta corporation, which built the crematoria at Birkenau. See also Werner Rademacher, "In memoriam Dipl.-Ing. Dr. techn. Walter Schreiber", VffG 4(1) (2000), pp. 104f. (online: www.vho.org/VffG/2000/1/Rademacher104f.html). He died in 1999.

Miklos Nyiszli's book Auschwitz: A Doctor's Eyewitness Account, Arcade Publishing, New York 1993, alleges, on p. 128, that the inmates took refuge in the gas chamber during air raids. Martin Gilbert's Auschwitz and the Allies (Henry Holt & Co., New York 1981), p. 309, contains the testimony of a female survivor, according to which she, together with many other female arriving inmates, was led to a darkened room to remain there during an air raid. What is most interesting about this testimony is the description of the manner in which some of the women became hysterical during the air raid and believed that they were inhaling poison gas. Another conclusion which could be drawn from this testimony is that the SS were concerned with protecting their inmates from air raids, and that there must have existed several such air raid shelters at Birkenau, which must have been gas-tight, that however remained entirely unnoticed and unstudied (from: S. Crowell, "Technik und Arbeitsweise deutscher Gasschutzbunker im Zweiten Weltkrieg", VffG 1(4) (1997), p. 242, fn. 4 online: www.vho.org/VffG/1997/4/Crowell4.html; Engl.: "Technique and Operation of German Anti-Gas Shelters in WWII: A Refutation of J.C. Pressac's Criminal Traces", online: www.codoh.com/incon/inconpressac.html). Another survivor reports that the inmates were regularly led into an air raid shelter during Allied air raids in 1944: Colin Rushton, Spectator in Hell. A British Soldier's Extraordinary Story, Pharaoh Press, Springhill (Berkshire) 1998.

The ventilation ducts of morgue 1 are visible in the plans published by J.-C. Pressac, op. cit. (note 67), pp. 224, 289; chapter on the ventilation installations of crematoria II and III: ibid., pp. 355ff.; engine power of the ventilation installations for all rooms in crematoria II and III: ibid., p. 374 and 377; size of the ventilation outlets: ibid., p. 234; Fig. of an outlet cover in the ventilation outlets.

For Pressac see footnote above; a similar opinion has been expressed by Van Pelt, Pelt Report, op. cit. (note 66), p. 208, as well as by Judge Gray in the Irving vs. Lipstadt trial, op. cit. (note 66), §7.62.

The engines had a nominal output of 2 HP (approximately 1.5 KW). The output data relate to a back-pressure of 40 mm water column. The increment calculations for estimating the ventilation shaft resistances in crematoria II & III according to engineering handbooks have shown that the back pressure to be expected would probably have been higher (in the region of 50-60 mm water columns), due, particularly, to the primitive lids with many small holes covering the ventilation slit. Two blowers were probably used for this reason. Personal communication from Hans Lamker, a certified engineer.

J.-C. Pressac gives the output of these blowers at 8,000 m³/h, but without proving it (together with Robert van Pelt in: Yisrael Gutman, Michael Berenbaum (ed.), Anatomy of the Auschwitz Death Camp, Indiana University Press, Bloomington 1994, pp. 210, 232). Perhaps he simply crudely added the output of the two blowers together, which is impermissible, since the blowers did not work in parallel, but rather, in series (behind each other).

Pre-heating: J.-C. Pressac, op. cit. (note 67), pp. 221, 223. Demolition of the water pipes: ibid., p. 286; for further details in this discussion, which is just as fruitless, since they are based on the "criminal traces" dreamed up by Pressac, see also, generally, H. Verbeke, op. cit. (note 43).

See also the above footnotes referring to Pressac, in particular, relating to the water pipes; a similar opinion expressed by Van Pelt, Pelt Report, op. cit. (note 66), p. 296, as well as by Judge Gray in the Irving vs. Lipstadt trial, op. cit. (note 66), §7.68.

J.-C. Pressac, op. cit. (note 67), p. 230. The waste heat of the forced draught blowers was to be used, but since these burned out and were removed, the entire pre-heating project for morgue 1 was cancelled.

The manipulations on this picture are overly plentiful, such as, for example, an interpolated drawing of a group of inmates allegedly marching over the roof of a barracks! See also J.C. Ball, ibid., p. 42; Ball, "Air Photo Evidence" in: Ernst Gauss (ed.), op. cit. (note 22), pp. 271-284 (online: www.vho.org/GB/Books/dth/fndaerial.html). On the alleged original photographs, it may furthermore be seen that the spots on morgues 1 of both crematoria (II + III) are pointing in different directions; ibid. private communication by J.C. Ball.

See, in this regard, the letter from the semi-official German Institut für Zeitgeschichte, in which, with relation to the Auschwitz State Museum, the reconstruction of the installations in crematorium I is described and the condition of the original ruins of the crematoria in Birkenau are briefly mentioned: H. Auerbach, Institut für Zeitgeschichte, Munich, letter dated March 20, 1992.

Please do not attempt to bend them back again! More recent photographs show that individuals have obviously broken off two of the three reinforcement rods during similar such attempts. One of these persons who unintentionally broke off one rod was Dr. Fredrick Töben in February 1997, as he advised me personally after his visit to Auschwitz. Another rod was broken off later by unknown person(s), see. Carlo Mattogno, "Keine Löcher, keine Gaskammer(n)" VffG 6(3) (2002), pp. 284-304 (online: www.vho.org/VffG/2002/3/Mattogno284-304.html).

J.-C. Pressac, op. cit. (note 67), p. 487; on p. 287, Pressac shows a rather primitive drawing with French inscriptions, probably prepared by a former French inmate on request of the Soviet investigation commission right after the war.

R. van Pelt, op. cit. (note 69), pp. 194, 208; caveat emptor: Though van Pelt's translation of Kula's testimony is erroneous, and though the data supplied in Kula's testimony is rather meager, van Pelt uses it to make five different, very detailed drawings-some of it necessarily based on van Pelt's fantasy, and the rest based on Kula's fantasy.

The brick-built air intake duct was easily accessible from the attic, where the fans were installed, and the ground floor; see J.-C. Pressac, op. cit. (note 67), pp. 276, 291, 329, 369. The use of the air intake fan to introduce HCN would have lead to some HCN losses through the air exhaust chimney already during the gassing, thus endangering anybody close to those crematoria, but certainly not more than would have been the case when all the HCN had to be removed after the end of a hypothetical gassing, so this would not be an argument against this technique. Also, such a loss of HCN is minimal compared to the loss following Kula's scenario. For more on this, see chapter 7.3.1.3.

Pressac points to a photo of crematorium IV, ibid., p. 417, as proof of his hypothesis. But since the photograph was taken from the south side while the corridor lies on the north side of the building, the door shown in the plan is the access, drawn on the plan, to one of the undesignated rooms. If he means to refer to crematorium V, hidden in the forest in the background, then it is impossible to claim seriously that anything can be recognized on this photo.

J.-C. Pressac, op. cit. (note 90), pp. 89f., alleges, in this regard, that a ventilation installation was built into crematorium IV only in late May 1944, but his remarks are untenable in this regard; see also Germar Rudolf, "Some Technical and Chemical Considerations about the 'Gas Chambers' of Auschwitz and Birkenau", in: Ernst Gauss (ed.), op. cit. (note 22), pp. 347f. (online: www.vho.org/GB/Books/dth/fndgcger.html).

At least the windows of those inmate barracks still accessible today in Birkenau have been installed in a very sloppy way, so that the wind blows intensely through the gaps. It is, however, questionable whether these barracks are authentic or were rebuilt after the war.

Absorption and Adsorption are not the same! Absorption is the incorporation (sometimes even consumption) of a matter into a medium (light is absorbed/consumed by a pigment, gas is absorbed/dissolves into a liquid), whereas Adsorption is the adhesion of matter onto a-usually solid-surface (dust on furniture, steam on windscreen, vapours on any solid surface...);Adsorption is further subdivided in chemisorption, in which the matter is bound to a surface by chemical bonds, and physisorption, in which the bonding is only a physical effect. The transition between both is fluent.

I also want to point out that I did not include all this academic, self-serving ivory tower chatter in order to impress people. I was simply advised by many friends, supporters, and adversaries to include all my material since back-references to my German original is no help to most English language speakers, of whom only a tiny fraction can read German.

H.J. Buser, D. Schwarzenbach, W. Peter, A. Ludi, Inorg. Chem. 16 (1977), pp. 2704-2710. Iron Blue single crystals of high purity and homogeneity were obtained by slow oxidation of a solution of Fe[FeII(CN)6] in concentrated (!) HClaq. in air. If in the presence of molar amounts of Kalium only some 2% inclusions were observed.

Dispersion (lat.: dispersere, distribute) are distribution of two different phases within each other. They are called colloids (gr.: gluelike) if the particles are between 10-8 and 10-7 m small. Such a mixture in liquids scatters the light (Tyndall effect), is thus not clear. But due to electrostatic repulsion (equally charged particles), colloids do not tend to coagulate and precipitate.Suspension: (lat.: to float) are coarsely dispersed system with particle sizes bigger than 10-6 m.

pH value of 9-10 according to M.A. Alich, D.T. Haworth, M.F. Johnson, J. Inorg. Nucl. Chem. 29 (1967), pp. 1637-1642. Spectroscopic studies of the reaction of hexacyanoferrate(III) in water and ethanol. 3.3×10-4 M Fe(NO3)3 were exposed with a cyanide excess of likewise 3.3×10-4 mol l-1. With pH values of approximately 10, all the Fe2[Fe(CN)6] was converted into Iron Blue within 48 hours. Cyanate, the anticipated product of the oxidation of the CN-, could not, however, be proven. Perhaps this is further oxidized directly into CO2. If this mechanism is assumed, the result, purely stoichiometrically, is that an alkaline environment must be favorable. This finding is supported by the known fact that hexacyanoferrate(III) is a strong oxidation agent in alkaline medium and is even able to oxidize trivalent chrome to hexavalent, therefore, that is, CN- ions must have oxidized very quickly: J.C. Bailar, Comprehensive Inorganic Chemistry, Vol. 3, Pergamon Press, Oxford 1973, p. 1047. An overly alkaline environment would, however, disturb the complexing of the Fe3+- ion by cyanide, which is then displaced by OH- (Fe(OH)3 then occurs as a by-product) and/or the latter can hardly be displaced from the iron.
The driving force in the reduction of the Fe3+ is the considerably more favorable energetical situation of the hexacyanoferrate(II) as compared to hexacyanoferrate(III); see, in this regard, R.M. Izatt, G.D. Watt, C.H. Bartholomew, J.J. Christensen, Inorg. Chem. 9 (1970), pp. 2019ff. Calorimetric measurements relating to the formation enthalpies of Iron Blue from respective educts (in brackets) were as follows:DH(Fe2+ + [Fe(CN)6]3-)= -66.128 kJ mol-1; DH(Fe3+ + [Fe(CN)6]4-)= 2.197 kJ mol-1.
For this reason, a direct reduction of uncomplexed Fe3+, i.e., not surrounded by cyanide, has an energy disadvantage and is therefore negligible.

nucleophilic (gr.: core/nucleus loving) is the tendency of a particle to react with positively charged particles. For this, at least a partial negative charge of the nucleophilic particle is required. In this case, cyanide is, due to its negative charge (CN-), much more nucleophilic towards the positively charge iron (Fe3+) than the formally uncharged (though polar) hydrogen cyanide.

Naturally, the equilibrium of the reaction Fe(OH)3 + 6 CN-« [Fe(CN)6]3- + 3 OH- under such conditions is strongly on the left hand side. However, this does not mean, as is well known, that a minute quantity of iron(III)-cyanide will not be formed. The latter, however, is withdrawn from the equilibrium in alkaline medium in the presence of excess cyanide, by being reduced by the latter to iron(II)-cyanide, which is considerably more stable in alkaline medium than iron(III)-cyanide; for further details, see also chapter 6.6.1.

In complex chemistry, ligands refer to in most cases negatively charged particles (anions) surrounding in most cases a positively charged central particle (cation, in general a metal ion). In this case, the central atom iron (Fe2+/3+) is surrounded by the ligand cyanide (CN-).

The influence is supposed to be based on the fact that carbonic acid (H2CO3, pKA= 6.37) displaces the cyanide ion (CN-) from the equilibrium: 1. CO2 + H2O « H2CO3; 2. CN- + H2CO3« HCN + HCO3-. Since, however, CO2 is only soluble in water with difficulty and since, in addition, the equilibrium of the reaction CO2 + H2O « H2CO3 (carbonic acid) lies almost completely on the left side, the concentration of carbonic acid in the moisture of masonry itself is several orders of magnitude lower than that of the hydrogen cyanide, even if the content of carbon dioxide in the room under consideration, exposed to hydrogen cyanide, is similar to the hydrogen cyanide content. HCO3-(pKA=10.25), finally, is a weaker acid than HCN (pKA=9.31) and would therefore be displaced by the latter: HCN + HCO3-« CN- + CO2 + H2O. Therefore, even a higher carbon dioxide content in air can hardly influence the absorption of hydrogen cyanide in masonry.

Iron(III)-hydroxide is even less soluble in this range than Iron Blue; on the solubility of Fe(OH)3 see chapter 6.6.3.; to be exact, Iron Blue is not totally destroyed at a high pH; rather, the Fe3+ is, initially, merely withdrawn; the base-resistant [Fe(CN)6]4- remains intact; see note 344.

This property is used in Russian industry, for example, for the passivation of steel pipes against aggressive waste waters, since CN- contained in waste waters coats the interior of pipes with an insoluble protective layer of Iron Blue: N.G. Chen, J. Appl. Chem. USSR, 74(1)(1974), pp. 139-142. But it should be noted that this borders on criminal negligence, since toxic cyanides simply do not belong in waste waters.

See also, in this regard, the remarks of a company dealing in colored cements and concretes: Davis Colors, 3700 East Olympics Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90023, www.coloredconcrete.com/davis/Tech/03470.html.

The solubility product of a compound is defined as the product of the entire ionic concentration of the totally dissociated compound: Fe4[Fe(CN)6]3 ® 4 Fe3+ + 3 [Fe(CN)6]4-;
KL(Fe4[Fe(CN)6]3) = c(Fe3+)·c(Fe3+)·c(Fe3+)·c(Fe3+)·c([Fe(CN)6]4-)·c([Fe(CN)6]4-)·c([Fe(CN)6]4-)
= c4(Fe3+)·c3([Fe(CN)6]4-).
The pKS value correlates to the negative decimal logarithm of the product of solubility.

In absence of free cyanide ions, the pH stability limit of hexacyanoferrate(II) (total dissociation) is at 11.8, but already very small amounts of free cyanide (10-10 mol l-1) push the limit up to pH=13.

The literature does not, however, mention this Iron Blue sample as "Prussian Blue", like the others, since it was, at that time, considered to be of another type, i.e., "Turnbull's Blue" or "ferrous ferricyanide".

An interesting study has been conducted in this connection about the reduction of soluble components in concrete standing in water, providing support to the statements made here: not even the concentration of alkali ions, which are the most soluble components of concrete, was massively reduced: H.A. El-Sayed, Cement and Concrete Research, 11 (1981), pp. 351-362.

See the Bavarian State Ministry for the Interior, Verfassungsschutzbericht 1997, Munich 1998, p. 64. A corresponding reference to the factual incorrectness of the remarks made in this regard by the Arbeitskreis Zeitgeschichte und Politik (in a letter by president Hans-Jürgen Witzsch, dated Oct. 8, 1998, Fürth) was countered by the Ministry as follows: "Your efforts to deny and/or relativize the crimes of the National Socialists have been known to the security authorities for years. [...] We see no occasion for a discussion of gas chambers." The letter, from Dr. Weber of the Bavarian State Ministry of the Interior dated Oct. 13, 1998, ref. IF1-1335.31-1, probably established a new world record for stupidty.

In the strongly alkaline environment, iron is passivated by a passive layer of Fe(OH)3. 'Botch work' on building sites, i.e., rusting reinforcement rods and cracking concrete after only a few years or decades, due to overly low pH value in the vicinity of the embedded reinforcement rods, is caused by a) an incorrect composition of the concrete (too little cement-it's cheaper this way-and/or too much or too little water-incompetence), or b) by installing the reinforcement rods too close to the surface of the concrete, where the pH value falls strongly after a few years or decades; see notes 396f.

Reversible attachment of the cyanide onto the Fe3+ of the cell-specific enzyme of respiration, cytochromoxidase, thereby interrupting the supply of oxygen to the cells, rendering impossible the processes of respiration which are essential for the life of the cell.

F. Flury, F. Zernik, Schädliche Gase, Dämpfe, Nebel, Rauch- und Staubarten, Berlin 1931, p. 405; see also M. Daunderer, Klinische Toxikologie, 30th suppl. delivery 10/87, ecomed, Landsberg 1987, pp. 4ff.; considering the age of the first source as well as the vast amount of literature quoted in chapter 5.2.2., Pressac's claim on page 147 of his first book (note 67) that the lethal dose was not known is completely false. It was also already a known fact in those days that HCN could be absorbed via the skin.

Unheated cellar rooms by their very nature, have very high relative atmospheric humidity. As a result of the large numbers of human beings crammed into the cellar, the atmospheric humidity would certainly approach 100%, resulting in the condensation of water on cold objects.

Reprinted in its entirety in T. Taylor, The Anatomy of the Nuremberg Trials, Little, Boston 1992, pp. 645ff.; probably the best analysis of the trial itself was written by Alexander von Knieriem, Nürnberg. Rechtliche und menschliche Probleme, Klett, Stuttgart 1953.

On the energy requirements in general and in the crematoria of Auschwitz in particular, see C. Mattogno and F. Deana, "The Crematoria Ovens of Auschwitz and Birkenau", in: E. Gauss (ed.), op. cit. (note 22), pp. 373-412 (online: www.vho.org/GB/Books/dth/fndcrema.html).

This is the so-called coke gas generator, where coke is burned with reduced oxygen supply, producing a combustible mixture of CO and H2 (and some CO2 and H2O), which burned in the muffle under addition of air.

F. Meyer, op. cit. (note 312). For an overview of the wide range and development of claims about the Auschwitz death toll, see Robert Faurisson, "How many deaths at Auschwitz?", The Revisionist, 1(1) (2003), pp. 17-23 (www.vho.org/tr/2003/Faurisson17-23.html).

At least because the initial evaporation of the hydrogen cyanide would have led to an immediate condensation of the environmental humidity onto the carrier, more or less interrupting the further evaporation of hydrogen cyanide; see also chapter 7.2.

See, for example, the pictures taken by the SS before and after delousing new arriving inmates, neatly separated by sex, as published in the Serge Klarsfeld (ed.), The Auschwitz Album. Lilly Jacob's Album, New York 1980.

For those who wish to see it written out:
Equation for release of HCN from the carrier material (in fractions):
A(t) = e-t/a
in which t = time after the initial release of HCN in minutes
in which a = 43.5/minutes (so as to attain the velocity and low atmospheric humidity at 15°C alleged by Irmscher, note 427)
Equation for the reduction of the HCN content through ventilation:
B(t) = e-t/b
in which b = necessary time for a single air exchange of the room in question.
Equation for the actual HCN content:
For the first 10 minutes (no ventilation, only release of HCN):
C1(t)=(1-A(t))×D
in which D = e/f
in which e = mass of Zyklon B introduced in grams)
in which f = volume of the chambers = 430 m³ (net volume, without the volume taken up by the victims)
e has been selected so as to attain a concentration of approximately 10g/m³ after 10 minutes. For the sake of simplicity, I have used 20 kg = 20,000 g .
Differential equation for the actual HCN content for times after 10 minutes, i.e., with ventilation, iteratively resolved into one minute steps:
C2(t+1)=C2(t)×e-1/b+(A(t))-A(t+1))×D
in which (A(t))-A(t+1))×D is the quantity of HCN evaporating from the carrier with each new minute.

In order to keep the HCN concentration in those make-shift delousing chambers of BW 5a and BW 5b constant over 12 hours, this would have required the application of an initial concentration at least twice or thrice as high as 10 g/m², but this would have been impossible due to lack of sufficient Zyklon B. The quantities of Zyklon B necessary for such use would have corresponded to 24 to 30 kg per day, or approximately 9 to 11 tons per year, which is roughly the total quantity delivered to the camp, leaving no HCN for homicidal gassings. Hence, this scenario is unrealistic for our purposes, because our scenario requires homicidal gassings; see also chapter 7.3.1.3.

The equations determined in chapter 6.7.4. consist of two terms, which can be handled individually or both together, and it is not at all clear, which time value is to be used when switching over from gassing to airing, which all influences the result.

I am not going to explain basic statistical laws of diffusion here. This law is so commonly known that anybody interested in it might look it up in any physics book. Maybe the iterative steps I used where a bit too big, so there is an error margin in my calculations, but if so, it affects all series, so it should not make a difference regarding my comparisons.

According to a part of the answer from "Nizkor" (www2.ca.nizkor.org/features/qar/qar29.html) to question no. 2: "Why did they use this instead of a gas more suitable for mass extermination?" (www.zundelsite.org/english/debate/debatetoc.html) of a flyer distributed by the Institute for Historical Review: 66 Questions and Answers on the Holocaust, IHR, Costa Mesa, undated.

C. Mattogno (Rome) has also taken samples from some of the installations ('gas chambers') at Birkenau and has had them analyzed; the findings concur with those of F.A. Leuchter and G. Rudolf. C. Mattogno, letter to the author, Rome, May 26, 1992.

Driving out the hydrogen cyanide by boiling the sample for one hour in aqueous HCl in a slightly reductive medium (SnCl2), Driving out in the continuous stream of air, collection in the aqueous KOH collector. Finally, photometric or titrimetric testing depending on the concentration in each case. Proof of iron was achieved here by the ICP spectrometer.

It is also conceivable that the unfumigated samples were contaminated during preparation for analysis, perhaps through an improperly cleaned ball mill, in which samples with a high cyanide content had previously been crushed. The reason for the good reproducibility may be that there is hardly any carbonate in brick, since it acts as a disturbance ion.

The first series of studies, undertaken by J. Markiewicz, W. Gubala, J. Labedz, and B. Trzcinska, were never published by the authors of the studies. Only the revisionists have published their findings, after the article was smuggled out of the Jan Sehn Institute by unknown persons in 1991; see also note 56; for further remarks on this example of 'political science', see G. Rudolf, op. cit. (note 58).

A word on the HCN-CO2 mixture used by the Poles for their fumigation experiments. In their view, CO2 has a negative influence on the adsorption of HCN in the masonry. Their own test results are, however, in contradiction to this view; they are also incorrect in assuming that CO2 could have a negative influence on the absorption of HCN; see also note 349, p. 165.

DIN 4108, part 3 to 5, deals with diffusion of steam into building materials. The most important coefficient for building materials is the so-called coefficient of diffusion resistance; this is a dimensionless number indicating, how much longer the diffusion of steam takes to penetrate a layer of certain materials compared to the time it takes to diffuse through the same layer of still air. This coefficient is valid not only for water vapor, but also for gaseous hydrogen cyanide as well as for any other gas. In the list of 100 different building materials compiled in DIN 4108 part 4, one can find lime and cement mortar with diffusion resistances from 15 to 35, in which case the resistance grows with increasing cement content, for gypsum plaster, the coefficient is 10, for brick walls 5 to 10, for glass wool mats it is 1. That means, if a gas diffuses through a layer of still air with a speed of 1 cm per second, it does take 15 to 35 seconds to diffuse through a 1 cm thick layer of lime or cement mortar and 5 to 10 seconds to diffuse just as deep into a brick wall. (I am grateful to Mr. C.H. Christmann for this reference.) In this regard, compare also the analysis about the porosity of masonry, graph 7, p. 183.

Incidentally, all the plaster in the church had be to knocked off the walls and replaced, since there was no other way to get rid of the Iron Blue. Communication from Konrad Fischer, head architect during the renovation of the church at that time.

With regards to the homicidal 'gas chambers', the period between March 1943 and the fall of 1944 is 'attested to'. Building 5a was completed in the fall of 1942 (TCIDK, 502-1-214; acc. to 502-1-22-19, it was completed already by June 20, 1942), but converted to operate with hot air in the summer of 1943 (J.-C. Pressac, op. cit.. (note 67), pp. 55-58; acc. to TCIDK, 502-1-24, equipment of BW 5a and 5b with hot air disinfestation facility started on Nov. 1, 1942).

For the homicidal 'gas chambers', this follows from the alleged victim totals of several hundred thousand victims per chamber; for the delousing installations, this follows from the maximum number of days available in 3/4 of a year (approximately 270 days).

Crematorium II was completed in February/March, after which the gassings are alleged to have begun in mid-March or the end of March. With relation to the delousing installations, we have no data, but one may assume that the building was used as soon as it was completed, even if it must be expected that the delousing chambers could not be used for a while, since, for delousing, it was necessary first to install all the equipment after completion of the building, i.e., undressing rooms, showers, saunas, heating, etc. The same applies, of course, to the crematoria/morgues.

Pressac (note 67) and van Pelt (note 69) are true masters in the composition of such inventions. The court historians either fail to notice or deliberately ingore the fact that these fairy tales are not based upon documents or physical reality.

Christlich Demokratische Union, Christian Democratic Union. They actually refused to be called conservative, and rightly so, since only a minority of their members has conservative views, the majority having quite liberal views. The CDU has no section in Bavaria, where the CSU plays its role, though the Bavarian CSU is more conservative than the 'Prussian' CDU.

Today, the German government consists of those who demonstrated against such politics in the 70s and 80s, and as was to be expected, they do even worse in politics: They wage war in Serbia and Afghanistan, and they are increasingly dismantling the Germans' civil rights.

Moreover, the Remer couple could remember as little from this chance meeting as from the two subsequent occasions on which I met them, when I appeared as an unknown, unimportant person among a crowd. (Summer 1991: On the return from my first Auschwitz trip, I accompanied Karl Philipp on a brief visit during a reception on Remer's 80th birthday. Philipp was Remer's friend who had initially contacted me, who had driven me to Auschwitz and helped me there, and who later helped me with all kinds of technical and infrastructural/logistical support. Autumn 1992: Dinner of the defense team during the trial against Remer, after the court had refused to accept me as an expert witness.) The Remers came to know me personally only in January 1995, when the Stuttgart District Court went to Spain to interrogate the Remer couple as part of the trial against me on account of the commentary that Remer had added to the report without asking me. Even then in Spain they needed to ask who I was. They got to know me fairly well only after I had fled to Spain in early 1996, where I resided for four months some 50 miles west of Remer's residence in exile.

Chapter 244 of the German Criminal Code provides that the court may reject evidence on the grounds of 'common knowledge' or complete unsuitability. This happens mostly in 'Holocaust' cases, and, indeed, without examination of the submitted evidence, to determine whether it is actually unsuitable or whether it may be able to defeat 'common knowledge', which it might do if it were superior to evidence previously submitted. In trials against revisionists and also against supposed 'National Socialist criminals,' exculpatory evidence is de facto verboten, a classic indication of a show trial.

VffG 3(2) (1999), p. 208; online: www.vho.org/VffG/1999/2/Zornig208.html. As a consequence of his prosecution, Bock subsequently changed his defense strategy, and when assigned to defend the Australian revisionist Dr. Fredrick Töben in November 1999, he remained completely silent in order to prevent further prosecutions, hence rendering any defense of Dr. Töben impossible.

There is always the possibility that the defense can hire its own stenographer to record the proceedings and type them up later. Then there would have to be a motion to insert this record into the record of the proceedings. Motions of this sort are always denied because the German Code of Criminal Procedures does not provide any rules for such records. In order to defeat the usual refusal of the court to accept such a motion on the grounds that the transcript is factually incorrect, the motion would have to be made either before the dismissal of the witness or immediately after the response of the accused or the defense attorney. Thereby the doubts of the court could be allayed through requestioning of the witnesses or the accused. Although the record of the statements can be entered into the record of the proceedings with the (denied) motion in this way, they will still be irrelevant in appeals and revision procedures. Considering the expense to the accused in time and money of such an effort over the course of, say, a thirty-day trial with twenty witnesses, it should be clear how impractical this scenario is.

The first edition was mailed out in some 15 copies in January 1992, the second in February 1992, the first version of the third edition in November 1992, and a slightly revised version of this edition (second version) in December 1992.

This brochure was mainly written by me (under four pen names), but made fit for publication by Karl Philipp, who made some changes to it and chose Remer as editor and publisher to protect me legally (which worked). As far as I know, Remer was not involved in the actual production of the brochure, and I was never involved in its distribution. Therefore, no link ever existed between my writing the brochure-without any intention to do it for Remer-and the fact that Philipp put Remer's name on it (probably even without Remer knowing it) after I had finished my writings. True, I never complained about it, but there was, realistically seen, no other way than Philipp's way to have this brochure published swiftly-which was necessary since it was a reaction to a series of articles in a weekly newspaper-, and I did not intend to reveal my pen names to anybody anyway, so why bother?
It should be mentioned in this context that this brochure still causes me some trouble in that my use of four pen names for it (Dipl.-Ing. Hans Karl Westphal, engineer; Dr. Werner Kretschmer, barrister, Dr. Christian Konrad, historian, Dr.Dr. Rainer Scholz, chemist and pharmacologist), all of them pretending to have a different academic degree, led to the accusation of dishonesty and attempted confidence trickery (see, e.g., www.holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/chemistry/not-the-science/). The background of these pen names was not the attempt to impress people with phony doctorates, though I must admit that it can have this effect. I therefore wish to set the record straight by repeating what I stated already elsewhere (www.vho.org/GB/c/GR/CharacterAssassins.html):
The first revisionist publication I was involved in was a brochure with the title Die Zeit lügt!, published in October 1992. It was a reply to two lengthy articles of a certain Till Bastian published in summer 1991 in the German weekly Die Zeit (no. 39, Sept. 18, 1992, p. 104, and no. 40, Sept. 25, 1992, p. 90). This brochure is the fairest writing about the Holocaust controversy that ever appeared, simply for the reason that both articles of Bastian were reprinted in their entirety, and discussed afterwards. The reader always has the means to check both points of view. Nobody else has ever done that before or since-on either side of this discussion.
Nowhere in that brochure is reference made to the special expertise and qualifications of the authors given-simply because these names were added after the brochure was written-nor would the claims and arguments brought forward in this brochure require the qualifications of these experts. Though it was certainly incorrect to do this, I would like to explain why it was done, as it was certainly not done in order to claim qualifications that are actually not present. Let me therefore be a bit more detailed.
In spring and summer 1992, I was called by several defense lawyers as an expert witness in several trials imposed on revisionists in Germany (Udo Walendy, District Court Bielefeld, February 1992; Gerd Honsik, Upper District Court Munich, March 1992; David Irving, County Court Munich, May 1992; Detscher, County Court Munich, July 1992; Max Wahl, District Court Munich, July 1992). In these trials-as in all trials against revisionists-the judges rejected any evidence presented by the defense, including all expert witnesses. In one case, I had to learn that a chemist (me) was rejected because he was neither a toxicologist nor a historian, an engineer (Leuchter) was rejected because he was neither a chemist nor a historian, and a historian (Prof. Haverbeck) was rejected because he was neither a chemist nor an engineer. My conclusions were that one obviously had to be at the same time an engineer, a chemist, a toxicologist, a historian and perhaps even a barrister to be accepted as an expert witness at a German court of law. The legal process being so perverted in Germany, I decided to mock it with a parody by inventing a person with all these features, but then Karl Philipp and I realized that this would be a bit unrealistic, so we split that person into many. That is the background. I think it is both tragic-for the victims of those German kangaroo trials-as well as funny-for the neutral observer to see the desperate attempts of German judges to keep any evidence out-, but the reader does, of course, not have to agree with me on that.

This article was completed after the house search of the small Berlin publishing house Verlag der Freunde at the end of November 1995 (triggered by a revisionist article of mine they had published), when it had become clear that the documentation of my trial intended to be published by this publisher could not appear; taken from Staatsbriefe 1/1996, Verlag Castel del Monte, Postfach 14 06 28, 80456 Munich, pp. 4-8.

For this version, the text of Remer's comments were retyped, trying to keep the layout as close to the original as possible. The original German version of this is available online at www.vho.org/D/Kardinal/Remer.html.

Asides from note 576 compare the book of Demjanjuk's defense lawyer: Yoram Sheftel, The Demjanjuk Affair. The Rise and Fall of the Show Trial, Victor Gollancz, London 1994; cf. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, March 11, 1995, p. 8.

G. Rudolf and J. Markiewicz, W. Gubala, J. Labedz, "Briefwechsel", Sleipnir, 1(3) (1995) pp. 29-33; online: www.vho.org/D/Kardinal/LeuchterR.html; Engl.: www.vho.org/GB/Books/cq/leuchter.html; G. Rudolf, "Kein Brief ins Gefängnis?", Sleipnir 1(2) (1995), not online. The criminal investigation against me in that case, Public Attorney's Office I in the District Court of Berlin, ref. 81 Js 1385/95, was dropped on March 21, 1996, under sec. 154 German Penal Procedure Rules (StPO), because the expected punishment "would not carry much weight" in comparison to the one expected from the District Court of Stuttgart in my first "thought crime" trial.

The uninitiated reader may be unaware that in Germany there is a division of the Criminal Police called the State Security Department which prosecutes politically motivated crimes. This department, by far the largest of the criminal offices, has separate areas for right-wing extremist, left-wing extremist, and foreign-influenced political crimes, respectively. Those employed in one department tend to have a political opinion hostile to their target group. For example, those in the right-wing extremist department tend to have left-wing, anti-fascist orientations. In addition, the German Federal court system includes State Security Chambers whose only work is to punish politically motivated crimes. The prosecutors who work in these courts were politically trained to deal with such crimes.

In the referenced book by Max Frisch, Herr Biedermann played just the opposite role of a paper criminal, he was the victim of a criminal (and his own gullibility). But this fact was not made clear to the viewer.

There is a detailed discussion of this broadcast in: W. Schlesiger, Der Fall Rudolf, op. cit. (note 91); there Rudolf disputes that he hid behind the pseudonym Ernst Gauss. He had admitted that in the trial in the District Court of Stuttgart, ref. 17 KLs 83/94.

Cf. Die Welt, May 15, 1995: "Unterstützen Unternehmer die rechtsextremen Szene?" (Do Businesses Support the Right-wing Extremist Scene?). As a result of this broadcast, Germar Rudolf's employer was placed under such pressure from his customers, suppliers, competitors, and employees that he terminated Herr Rudolf's employment contract.

H. Lummert thinks that one should stay with the abbreviation for BRD: "Bubisrepublik Deutschland" (Bubis Republic Germany). Approximately 30 witnesses testified that they had never heard Germar Rudolf make anti-Semitic remarks and that he had even protested against their use. There was no contrary testimony. The media likewise ignored a speech at an academic fraternity by Rudolf to students which was clearly pro-Jewish. On May 9, 1995, the court verified that the speech had taken place.

Verdict of the District Court Stuttgart, ref. 17 KLs 83/94, pp. 15, 156ff. As evidence the court used an unpublished writing of the accused. In it, Rudolf commented how the confirmation of revisionist theses might embarrass Jews. Records of the District Court Stuttgart, ref. 17 KLs 83/94, Computer Data File 3, introduced on Jan. 26, 1995. Where there is racism in these speculative remarks is unclear.

This is the trick used to send revisionists to jail: Since everyone knows that the Holocaust happened, revisionists must know it also. When they still assert the opposite, they must do so wittingly and therefore they lie. Whoever lies has evil intentions and therefore belongs behind bars. Such is the logic of terror.

Germar Rudolf's doctoral supervisor, Prof. Dr. Dr. h. c. H. G. von Schnering, as well as several other professors at the Max- Planck- Institute for Solid State Research received the pirated version on this day: decision, District Court Stuttgart, ref. 17 KLs 83/94, p. 126.

A later letter of the Central Council of Jews to the President of the MPG on June 22, 1993, refers to this telephone call. Facsimile published in Wilhelm Schlesiger, Der Fall Rudolf, op. cit. (note 91); from the records of the Labor Court Stuttgart in the case Rudolf v. Max- Planck- Institute for Solid State Research, ref. 14 Ca 6663/93.

According to information from his secretary, Prof. Simon knew what role he was being forced to play, but for opportunistic reasons he put his career and the reputation of the Max-Planck-Institute ahead of upholding the principles of scientific research; information received from my former wife who still workes at this institute. On this affair, cf. also Prof. Simon's revealing statements and the discussion on the social taboo that must be observed by German scientists in: W. Schlesiger, Der Fall Rudolf, (note 91).

Labor Court of Stuttgart, ref. 14 Ca 6663/93. A detailed description of the events in the Max-Planck-Institute and elsewhere about the Rudolf report during the year 1993, with a series of reproduced documents, can be found in the brochure W. Schlesiger, The Rudolf Case, op. cit. (note 91).

Ref. IX 1496/79, decision on March 18, 1981. At that time, a person who had been convicted to five years imprisonment for a drug offense which was entered in his police record, was certified as having the necessary ethical qualification, and the University was ordered to admit him to the Rigorosum. In this decision, it was held that this Hitler law is still in effect because it does not contain National Socialist thinking and should be considered as having been legally enacted.

Ref. 13 K 1329/94. After the prison sentence against Rudolf was announced, Rudolf's doctoral supervisor commented that he would have to sit out his punishment before he could complete his doctoral program. Prof. von Schnering was apparently always ready to stand behind his candidate.

Trial District Court Stuttgart, ref. 17 KLs 83/94, Letter of the 17th Criminal Justice Chamber of the District Court of Stuttgart to the Federal High Court (BGH) on April 21, 1994. Investigation File 2, sheet 768. Answer of the Federal High Court on April 26, 1994 with enclosure: decision on March 15, 1994 re: G. A. Deckert, ref. 1 StR 179/93.

Sheet 1411 of the Records in Trial District Court Stuttgart, ref. 17 KLs 83/94, with the hand-written note by Dr. Mayer that access to the records should be granted after records had been returned by the defense.